Sorry, but the rehab effort of Andy Sullivan isn't cutting it. Sullivan today:
When I heard the usual complaints from the left about how we had no right to intervene, how Bush was the real terrorist, how war was always wrong, my trained ears heard the same cries that I had heard in the 1980s. So I saw the opposition to the war as another example of a faulty Vietnam Syndrome, associated it with the far left, or boomer nostalgia, and was revolted by the anti-war marches I saw in Washington.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co...
Poor baby. A little "revolted" conservative, so lots of people had to die.
Let's take a look at Sullivan at the time:
2002:
The decadent left in its enclaves on the coasts is not dead -and may well mount a fifth column.
2003:
At this point, it seems to me that a refusal to extend the war to Iraq is not even an option. We have to extend it to Iraq.
2003:
[T]he president ... has to make this strategy more formal. He has to tell the American people that more violence in Iraq may not in some circumstances be a bad thing. It may be a sign that we are flushing out terror and confronting it, rather than passively waiting for it to attack again.
2003 [via Alterman]:
In the space of a few days, Sullivan's site recommended articles by Ann Coulter, David Horowitz, Norman Podhoretz, William F. Buckley and Michael Ledeen. Not exactly Orwell Country, I fear.
What about now? Post Iraq epiphany?
2007:
McCain’s positions on the war, moreover, even when they have been mistaken, have always been honest and responsible.
And the kicker:
What McCain has to do is to coopt Obama’s message. McCain has to become the change candidate. He has a record that makes this plausible enough. He has long been a rebel in Washington...
Andy Sullivan: Liar. Hypocrite. Wanker.